Higher education · Working concept · Evaluation and decision framework

AI Cost, Use, and Outcomes

Campuses need to know whether an AI use is worth continuing, not just whether people use it. Measure Cost, Use, and Outcomes against a baseline, then decide to continue, improve, expand, restrict, or retire. Designed for anything from one person’s task to a campus-wide platform, with effort scaled to the stakes.

The problem it solves
  • Logins and licenses stand in for value
  • Freed hours are counted as budget savings
  • Tools renew by habit, with no baseline
  • Each unit judges differently, so results can’t be compared
  • Risk is checked once, then drifts
The fix: one common process across campus, with measures and thresholds fit to each use.

One evaluation, start to finish

Full case study →
  1. 1 · Use caseA 12-person office drafts weekly meeting summaries with the campus AI assistant.
  2. 2 · Baseline35 minutes per summary, written by hand.
  3. 3 · CostNo new license cost. 30 min training each; 8 min review per summary.
  4. 4 · Use9 of 12 staff use it; 85% of drafts accepted after light edits.
  5. 5 · Outcome14 minutes per summary, including review. About 3.5 hours a week released.
  6. 6 · Evidence limitsFour weeks, small sample, no control group. No money saved.
  7. 7 · DecisionContinue. Released hours count as capacity, not dollars.
  8. 8 · Next reviewIn two terms, or sooner if the tool changes how it handles data.

Illustrative figures. You can start with one use like this; the Compass and Registry help at scale but aren’t required.

Choose your path

Go deeper

A working concept, open for improvement

It grew from seeing many claims about AI’s value in higher education and little empirical evidence behind them. It is a starting point for campuses to consider and adapt, not a finished standard. If you try it, share how you used it, what worked, and what should change.

Share how you’re using it